WSJ.com to Become Free

Wednesday, November 14, 2007 | 06:57 AM

The Associate Press reported last night that once the Dow Jones deal closes at year's end, Murdoch plans on giving away access to WSJ.com -- for free.

"Rupert Murdoch, the chairman of the News Corporation, said today that he intended to make access to The Wall Street Journal’s Web site free, trading subscription fees for anticipated ad revenue.

“We are studying it and we expect to make that free, and instead of having one million, having at least 10 million-15 million in every corner of the earth,” Mr. Murdoch said, referring to The Journal’s online readership.

I am going to take a contrary position on this: I believe this is -- in part -- a mistake.

Thumb through either the print or online Journal, and you will see many high end luxe advertisers. They are not attracted by the sheer volume of readers, but rather, by the very appealing reader demographics: They pay a huge premium in ad rates to reach the highly educated, high income, tech savvy, free spending readers of the WSJ. (The demographics of a Journal reader are nearly as attractive as are those of The Big Picture's).

Ironically, this raises an issue we have seen with another Murdoch property: Fox News. I have been told by several people in the advertising biz that despite Fox News utterly kicking CNN's ass in the ratings, CNN charges much higher ad rates. Their ad sales, despite having lower total number of viewers, is more lucrative.

Why?

The simple answer is demographics. I have not personally seen the data, but according to these "Ad men," the CNN viewer has much better education and income numbers amongst; Fox news badly trails CNN in this department. The issue of disposable incomes of viewers surely concersn advertisers. One said to me "We can sell basic necessities on Fox and cheap trinkets; We can sell more upscale brands on CNN, and we can sell a lot more upscale goods on CNBC."

Hence, the business idea behind Fox Business channel: Aim for Fox News viewer numbers, with demographics between CNN and CNBC. If it works -- tho far from a sure thing -- it will be a huge money maker.

Murdoch apparently wants to apply the same idea to WSJ.com: Get USA Today numbers but charge WSJ ad rates.

I am not so sure this will work: The Journal can and does charge a premium for their ads because of who is presently willing to pay for the service -- both in print, and online: Those consumers advertisers find extremely attractive.

I remain am unconvinced that saying to advertisers "Come see all of our readers who can't or won't pay $79 per year for the WSJ.com" is a strategy for selling more high end luxe brands.

A hybrid system makes the most sense to us. As we previously suggested in WSJ: Free or Paid? (Yes) charging those willing to pay for the most recent WSJ.com (i.e., the most recent 2 weeks or so) will capture the highest end readers for those high paying advertisers who want to reach them. Pulling the rest of the paper out from behind the firewall for the broader advertisers has been my advice to the WSJ.com for several years now.

Hey, that's just my opinion; Mr. Murdoch has shown over the years that he is a crafty businessman with a good feel for what the reading/viewing public wants. 

We'll find out soon enough what the fate of the firewalled WSJ.com will be . . .




>

Source:
Murdoch Intends to Drop WSJ.com Fee
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
NYT, November 13, 2007
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/business/apee-journal.html

Murdoch Sees End to Journal Web Fees
LYNDAL MCFARLAND and SARAH ELLISON
WSJ, November 13, 2007 8:28 p.m.; Page B4
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119496001563491328.html

Wednesday, November 14, 2007 | 06:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (40) | TrackBack (2)
de.li.cious add to de.li.cious | digg digg this! | technorati add to technorati | email email this post

bn-image

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c52a953ef00e54f82c9db8833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference WSJ.com to Become Free:

» WSJ.com to become Free from idomba.net
The Big Picture, a blog Ive recently begun reading, has a great post on News Corp.s recent announcement that the online Wall Street Journal will be free to all. Rupert Murdoch, the chairman of the News Corporation, said today t... [Read More]

Tracked on Nov 14, 2007 10:41:57 AM

» BizLinks | 11.14.07 from Loren Steffy
Crude rebounds slightly in overseas dealing Prosecutors oppose new trial for Skilling Investor Safe Haven Becomes a Concern-- the next shoe dropping in the mortgage meltdown: the cost of protecting money market funds. Sirius, XM Holders Approve ... [Read More]

Tracked on Nov 14, 2007 10:52:04 AM

Comments

So much for the rich being Republicans and the poor being Democratics - I always new that, that was a big crock of crap. Murdocks idea seems very lucrative, in the long run: establish "price wars" with your competitors, thereby eliminating them, while encompensing the the earth with your product. Think of all the up-start Chinese and Indian, etc., viewers that are becoming middle-class.

Posted by: justin | Nov 14, 2007 7:36:09 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.



Recent Posts

December 2008
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      

Archives

Complete Archives List

Blogroll

Blogroll

Category Cloud

On the Nightstand

On the Nightstand

 Subscribe in a reader

Get The Big Picture!
Enter your email address:


Read our privacy policy

Essays & Effluvia

The Apprenticed Investor

Apprenticed Investor

About Me

About Me
email me

Favorite Posts

Tools and Feeds

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Add to Google Reader or Homepage

Subscribe to The Big Picture

Powered by FeedBurner

Add to Technorati Favorites

FeedBurner


My Wishlist

Worth Perusing

Worth Perusing

mp3s Spinning

MP3s Spinning

My Photo

Disclaimer

Disclaimer

Odds & Ends

Site by Moxie Design Studios™

FeedBurner